A less contentious affair than last month’s Summit , this second of three, âIn-Depth Explorations of D.C. Theatre,â led by Washington Post critic Peter Marks and hosted by Arena Stage was by no means a merely light and trivial evening. Whereas the focus of the first discussion, with local artistic directors, was the troubled American theatre and inequities in season selection, this event looked at the difficult life of the actor. The tone did remain friendly throughout, and the five actors in the panel drew plenty of warm laughter from the audience, despite the fairly heavy subject matter.

âIf last time we talked about the people who run the theatres, tonight weâre gonna talk about the people who make the theatre happen,â said Marks, before introducing the actors: Tom Story, primarily associated with Shakespeare and Studio Theatres; Nova Y. Payton, frequently seen at Signature and soon at Arena Stage in Smokey Joeâs Cafe; Kimberly Gilbert, company member at Woolly Mammoth and Taffety Punk; Richard Thomas, the veteran New York actor, currently in Camp David at Arena Stage and Helen Carey, a New York veteran as well, familiar to DC audiences from performances at Arena and Shakespeare Theatre (and who was unfortunately delayed and arrived late).
âIâm sort of fascinated by the life of actor, a stage actor particularly,â said Marks. âOnce youâve picked it, you spend the rest of your life waiting to be picked.â
The cheerfully self-deprecating Thomas answered Marksâ opening question about what it is about the actors that allows them to do what they do by saying, simply, âNo skills.â
âThis life that we choose to be in⊠itâs not a ladder-climbing life, itâs a roller coaster,â Gilbert said, to which, later, Thomas added, saying, âAs you said, itâs not a ladder situation â itâs Chutes and Ladders.â
âI take responsibility for the choice,â said Story, âand I donât expect people to feel sorry for me because I decided that this was⊠the only thing that would make me happy.â
All the actors agreed that the unpredictability of getting work was something they simply lived with, and they all continued as actors simply because they loved it. âI want to still do what I love to do,â Payton said, speaking of continuing her stage work even after giving birth to her son.
Marks, perhaps, revealed his intentions for this edition of the Summit, in response to the actorsâ cheerfulness and passion.
âWhen youâre talking, it reminds me, you know â the person reviewing the theatre can make a living (if youâre working at the Washington Post)⊠the person who runs the theatre makes a very good living running the theatre⊠but the actorsâŠâ said Marks, before citing a recent piece written by choreographer/director Annie B. Parson, “This Performance Subsidized by Sweat Equity“. Parson talks about Here Lies Love, a show she choreographed in New York, which sold out at $100 a ticket. Marks quoted from her piece at length to illustrate his point:
“The actors who were in this show were earning ‘as low as $386 a week during rehearsals and $544 a week during performances. This is BEFORE taxes, agent fees and Union fees. Dutifully and beautifully performing eight shows a week (plus pickup rehearsals, video shoots and recordings), these stars join the working poor of New York Cityâall for love of the historical and political content of the show.'” (At those rates, the actors would indeed at least partially qualify for a proposed low-income tax credit for the working poor in New York City.)
ââTheir well-trained, low-paid sweat was indeed part of the equity of the show,ââ Marks continued, reading from the essay, ââAnd let me be clear, Here Lies Love is not alone in paying performers at this abysmal level; it is a common practice done in many off-Broadway theaters.  A few years ago, [Parsonâs] husband, Paul Lazar, performed in Classic Stage Company’s production of Three Sisters (Maggie Gyllenhaal and Peter Sarsgaard were his cast-mates)âhe netted $409.35 per week⊠The value of the arts in society has been written about and studied ad nauseamâfrom purple prose to hard science. Assuming that you, reader, agree that the arts are a necessity, it might come as a surprise to know that most of the mega-talented performers you see onstage earn less than your babysitter.ââ
This drew some noises of surprise from the audience, and a sincere âthank you for bringing that upâ from Thomas, who added, âpeople donât know, they just donât know.â
Itâs worth noting a criticism made later, on Twitter, at this point; Adi Stein tweeted, âAn hour in #TheSummit and the âsmallestâ theatre discussed is Signature and the lowest income mentioned is $400 a week. I’d love either,â within a longer series of responses questioning why no non-Equity performers were represented on the panel. It may be said that Stein, in this way, pointed out that the situation is truly troubling, when non-Equity actors would love to receive the wages which top-of-their-field stars receive â and which puts them in a class with âthe working poor.â
– This event was live-streamed, and can be viewed in its entirety online. –
âIâm trying to understand how one rationalizes that as a talented person,â said Marks to the actors, of the economic conditions. âIs it that⊠the psychic rewards are so high for you, that [being underpaid] doesnât matter?â
âItâs a combinationâ of a lot of factors, said Story, including âpsychic rewards,â the hope that work will lead to more work, and attraction to particular plays. Payton added that she set other goals for her career, such as getting a chance to work at a theater she hasnât worked at before.
âIf youâre going into this acting thing⊠itâs so weird to call it a business, because if youâre going into it, youâre clearly not money-driven, and if you are then youâre deluded,â said Gilbert. âWhen you take a role for 400 bucks a week⊠we have no other choice.â
âYou could stop doing it,â said Marks.
âThe reason that I do it is that this is all, this is all,â replied Gilbert. âI was born this way.â
Story responded to that, adding seriously, âItâs almost like being gay⊠itâs immutable⊠you canât not do it.â
âItâs the most heartbreaking thing, when you have to turn down rolesâ due to being unable to afford it, said Gilbert.
(Around this time, Carey arrived to the stage.)
âDo you all feel as if youâre part of a Washington repertory company,â asked Marks, referring to what Payton said. âDoes that create that feeling that Iâm making progress too, that youâre known to a number of theatres?â
âThat company thing⊠doesnât exist,â said Story. âIt doesnât totally exist at Shakespeare [Theatre]⊠itâs not the same thing that it used to be.â
âThereâs places that I think everybody frequents⊠but thereâs no twelve-month contract⊠it is all independent contractor work,â Gilbert said.
For her part, Carey described the theatre scene as âone big play pen,â and continued, âThe âcompanyâ comes when audience members come up⊠and say âoh I love watching this and that.â  And this town is full of avid theatre goers, and thatâs the connection I make, is that people love theatre here.â
âJust listening to the rounds of applause in the audience when you mention particular performances is exactly what youâre all talking about,â said Thomas, referencing the audience response to, for instance, Marks praising Payton for her work in Dreamgirls at various points in the discussion.
Thomas went on to say of D.C. that it is âprobably my favorite city to play outside of my hometownâŠÂ Iâve found the audiences highly intelligent and avid and very⊠very ready. âŠThe community loves their actors,â he said.
âThey just donât pay their actors!â responded Marks.
Gilbert discussed how she has always needed to hold down two or three other jobs, including one as a barista at Tryst Coffeehouse, to pay her bills, to which Marks asked, âIs there a shame factor⊠to have this impressive onstage thing⊠and then say⊠âcheck please?ââ
Gilbert described how at the coffee shop she served at, the patrons would sit on low couches, and when they would look up and recognize her, they would be perplexed that someone theyâd seen onstage was serving them.
âAnd they feel shame for being served,â said Gilbert, by the artist who had performed for them.
Switching gears, Marks asked, âdo you still all have anxiety going on a stage? âŠIs it different for you now than when you started out?â
âItâs healthy anticipation,â said Carey, âif you donât feel youâve got the reins as youâre waiting in the wings, god help you â because, as my mother said long ago when I was very young⊠âHelen, no oneâs coming to watch you be nervous.ââ
âI donât want to disappoint myself,â said Story. âThat is my terror, that Iâm not going to live up to my potential.â
Marks went on to ask the actors, âdo you read reviews?â
âYou donât write [the reviews] for us,â noted Story.
âI think of it almost as talking behind your back,â agreed Marks. âAnd I donât mean that in⊠a nasty snarky way.â
The panel went on to discuss how, in this day and age, everyone gets reviewed â even plumbers â and anyone sitting in their basement can post reviews online.
At the end of the evening, the actors took some questions from the audience, including one about the expansion of the D.C. theatre scene:
âI moved to Washington from New York 35 years ago,â said the audience member. âTheater was slim pickins⊠now itâs just great, Virginia, Maryland, D.C., big, small, every single kind of theatre⊠it sounds like all of you have perspective on this⊠what happened that has given this incredible birth to this wonderful range of theatre in Washington D.C.?â
âI think this has always been a really, really juicy audience town,â responded Carey. âI think once upon a time⊠for years and years Washington was a âpolitical townâ â we wonât start on that â but itâs so much more now, itâs grown and grown and grown⊠The bar has been raised all across Washington, and if you want something edgy, if you want something classical, if you want a new play, if you want a play not being spoken, you know, you can find just about everything that suits your taste in this city.â
âThe dynamic, whether anybody wants to admit it or not⊠in terms of theatre in this country⊠the dynamic has shifted,â said Gilbert. âItâs no longer just âyou can be a professional actor if youâre living in L.A. or New York.â Itâs gone. Itâs a myth. Communities like this, that have grown over the past decade and a half⊠where people said, no, Iâm gonna stay here, and Iâm going to create the work that I want to do⊠I think thatâs what happened⊠this cohesive choice⊠that a lot of people just stayed and wanted to make sure that it was about the creation of art.â
Marks said, âthereâs a peculiar alchemy in Washington.â He identified how a number of distinct companies grew up together, each with their own distinct personality, and said that this dynamic ânurtured a greater theatergoing habit.â
âThereâs more worry about making money as itâs grown,â continued Marks. âThis worry about money, partially occasioned by the creation of these monuments to theatre all across town⊠it really sucks a lot of money out of rest of the ecosystem.â
For the final questions, the divide between professional and community theatre was brought up. An audience member raised the matter of what she termed âreverse snobberyâ in the community theatre, where the performers there will criticize the professional actors, saying âthey donât do it for the love of it the way we do.â
âI wish the two worlds would⊠intersect more,â the woman said.
Story replied, âThe snobbery thing irritates me on all levels⊠thereâs not much difference in all of it⊠I donât think anyone is in the position to be a snob because no one is getting rich and amazing things happen in small places too.â
âIn terms of the monetary thing,â said Gilbert, âsome gigs you get paid really well, some gigs you donât get paid really wellâ âthereâs no difference, there really is no difference.â
Marks concluded the evening by emphasizing the recurring point. âI just want to end it by saying that⊠the truth of the matter is the five of you give back so much more value than you get from us.â
——————-
On April 28th, playwrights and directors will join Peter Marks for the third and final Summit. The event is sold out.
The scheduled panelists are: Robert OâHara, Ari Roth, Jacqueline E. Lawton, David Muse, Rachel Grossman, and
Norman Allen.
yet again, the summit brought up something that was quickly whisked under the rug (& kudos to adi!). there has been great theatre in community playhouses in this area, as well as the smaller professional companies, & peter marks just can’t understand why someone would willingly put themselves in that position. next time, ask HIM why would anyone travel to new york to watch a lot of the drivel that’s being presented by this country’s supposed “best”, & then spend column inches devoted to the concept that theatre is so much better in new york. that’s a bit of an insult to those of us local actors that are no less passionate about it.
peter, i DARE you, write a monthly column about someone who’s in a smaller pay (or non-paid) show, how they can put their lives on hold to do a show for little (or no) pay: night in, night out; little (or no) insurance; spouses/family/significant others/cat/dog/goldfish that are left waiting until they get home. but i doubt you will, because you can’t “…understand how one rationalizes that as a talented person”. you see, sometimes as an artist, you make choices that don’t always pay the bills. that’s part of what draws us into the world of the arts. we serve coffee, we wait tables, etc., just like actors in new york. but we LOVE what we do.
yeah, some of us are part of “the working poor”, but we choose to produce art because whether we can name it or not, we feel a calling to express ourselves in ways that don’t equal getting a living wage. some of us have full-time day jobs too, & it’s no less pressure to have a “doctor’s appointment” to go to an audition for a large local company. or even for film/tv/commercial auditions. even though we KNOW FOR A FACT that we’re not going to get it because we don’t have a new york address/telephone number/credits on our resume.
we local actors have plenty of credits on our resumes for local companies that had to fold because they just couldn’t sustain. not because they sucked or were hemorraghing money, but partly because the pressures of every day life. i would MUCH rather read an interview, or hear from, a local actor who’s in a show simply because they LOVE the work itself. i’m not interested in reading a review of whatever happens to be running on broadway. good for the b’way actors, who are working, & god bless ’em.
in my opinion, “professional actor” does not always equal talent, passion, & drive, that swells in the hearts of the rest of us who are in it not just for the money. but god bless us too, who continue to strive & THRIVE!
by the way, my favorite joke: who is this guy, art, & why do i keep suffering for him?